in Re the Estate of William H. McNutt
04-15-00110-CV
| Tex. App. | Aug 19, 2015Background
- In 1983 William H. McNutt allegedly told his daughter Sherry to return to the family ranch to run it and said he would give her “half the ranch”; Sherry moved back, occupied and improved the foreman’s house, and ran ranching operations.
- After William’s death, litigation arose over whether he made an oral gift of the foreman’s house and how much acreage was necessary for full use and enjoyment of that house (the “North side” ~2,000 acres).
- First trial/appeal: trial court found a gift of the foreman’s house (but not the entire North side); this Court affirmed the house gift but remanded to determine the appropriate acreage required for full use and enjoyment of the house.
- On remand a jury again found (by clear and convincing evidence) that William gifted the foreman’s house and that “1/2 of the North Side” constituted an appropriate amount of acreage for full use and enjoyment.
- Appellants (ranch entities) appealed, arguing legal and factual insufficiency, error in the jury charge, and juror misconduct; appellee (Sherry) urges affirmation, relying on testimony of possession, donor statements, improvements, and explanations for tax treatment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (McNutt) | Defendant's Argument (Ranch/Appellants) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Whether an oral gift of the foreman’s house occurred in 1983 | McNutt: Bill’s contemporaneous statements, delivery of possession, daughter’s occupancy and improvements, and witnesses support a gift | Appellants: Lack of deed, continued tax payments, no gift tax return, and insufficient specificity defeat the gift | Court: Jury had legally and factually sufficient evidence to find an oral gift of the house (affirmed) |
| 2. Appropriate acreage for full use and enjoyment of the house (remanded issue) | McNutt: Her ranching/use of the house required substantial acreage; testimony supports awarding 1/2 North Side | Appellants: No specific parcel evidence admitted; trial evidence insufficient to support 1/2 North Side | Court: Evidence permitted a reasonable factfinder to conclude 1/2 North Side was appropriate acreage (affirmed) |
| 3. Denial of directed verdict / judgment n.o.v. | McNutt: Sufficient evidence (possession, statements, improvements, tax explanations) warranted submission to jury | Appellants: Evidence legally insufficient; directed verdict/JNOV should have been granted | Court: Standard for removing case from jury not met; trial court properly denied directed verdict and JNOV (affirmed) |
| 4. Jury charge and alleged juror misconduct | McNutt: Charge matched remand instruction and law of the case; juror affidavits about deliberations are inadmissible | Appellants: Charge error and juror statements outside the record warrant new trial | Court: Charge was proper within remand scope; juror affidavits about deliberations inadmissible under Tex. R. Civ. P. 327(b); no new trial (affirmed) |
Key Cases Cited
- City of Keller v. Wilson, 168 S.W.3d 802 (Tex. 2005) (standards for reviewing legal and factual sufficiency of evidence)
- In re J.F.C., 96 S.W.3d 256 (Tex. 2002) (clear-and-convincing evidence review guidance)
- In re C.H., 89 S.W.3d 17 (Tex. 2002) (clear-and-convincing standard principles)
- Golden Eagle Archery, Inc. v. Jackson, 24 S.W.3d 362 (Tex. 2000) (requirements and limits on juror testimony about deliberations)
- Thompson v. Dart, 746 S.W.2d 821 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1988, no writ) (elements for oral gift of real property)
- Hooks v. Bridgewater, 229 S.W. 1114 (Tex. 1921) (discussion of gift in praesenti and required intent)